Quantcast

mariners logoSee? Ridiculous, immediate, and completely contradictory things are reported involving teams other than the Cubs.

Not a few hours after reports circulated that Robinson Cano and agent Jay-Z had blown things with the Seattle Mariners in a visit last night, Enrique Rojas is reporting that the two sides have actually agreed to a monster 10-year, $240 million contract. Multiple other reports say a deal is close.

I dug into the implications of such a large contract with the Mariners earlier this morning, but the short version is: the Mariners will regret the deal in terms of baseball value, but they must be hoping it will pay off-the-field dividends. Further, it’s the kind of signing you don’t make unless you’re planning to add additional significant pieces, because, alone, Cano does not make the Mariners a competitive team.

You can look now for the Mariners to even more aggressively pursue David Price in trade, or maybe even someone like Jeff Samardzija. They could instead look to add a free agent arm – or Masahiro Tanaka, assuming he’s posted – and/or a free agent bat in the outfield. If the Mariners get in heavily on Tanaka, this was a double-whammy, because we now know that the Yankees will have plenty of money for him if they want.

Given that everyone in baseball seemed to be assuming that Cano would eventually return to the Yankees, this signing has the potential to complete disrupt the rest of the market (including by way of the Yankees’ subsequent moves). The impact might take several days to sort out. I guess next week’s Winter Meetings are well-timed after all.

  • mjhurdle

    that Granderson contract, to me, looks ridiculous. 4/60M? just seems way too high

  • mjhurdle

    FURCAL TO THE MARLINS!!! OMG BIGGEST SIGNING EVER!!

  • trust me

    Or cano goes to mariners only to never be heard again.

  • Jeff

    Barney to NYY?????

    • mjhurdle

      why?

      • Jeff

        they need a 2B

        • MichiganGoat

          Nobody needs a Barney as a starter.

          • Jeff

            that’s why we need to trade him, duh….lol

            • On The Farm

              I am feeling more and more confident that by the end of the season he won’t be the Cubs starter.

              • Jeff

                I’m hoping for Arismendy Alcantara by July, if an Ackley or Franklin isn’t obtained.

          • mjhurdle

            ^this

  • http://bleachernation Ferris

    Feldman to stros……dang

    • On The Farm

      ….why?

      • http://bleachernation Ferris

        Look at his numbers…he was actually better than shark last yr who apperently turnd down cubs 55 m for 5…..

        • bbmoney

          Depends on what numbers you’re looking at. ERA and W’s only?

          It was also the best year of his career. I’m happy for Scott, I don’t think its an unreasonable contract. But he’s not better than Shark.

        • On The Farm

          Um what?

          ERA: Feldman 3.86/Shark 4.34
          FIP: 4.03/3.77
          xFIP: 3.96/3.45
          WAR 2.1/2.8
          K/9: 6.54/9.01
          BB/9: 2.77/3.29

          Shark is the better pitcher in about every category other than BBs and ERA. I would rather have Shark’s stats than Feldman’s for sure.

          • JB88

            Not to mention, even if you were comparing Shark to Feldman’s time on the Cubs, only, Shark was hugely dominant to Feldman during that time.

            Through June of last year, Samardzija put up 2.4 WAR compared to Feldman’s 1.2 WAR. Feldman had a huge May (1.0 WAR), but Shark put up .9 WAR, .8 WAR, and .7 WAR in April through June.

  • X The Cubs Fan

    30 million

    • Jeff

      …..why?

      just want to be like the other guys :)

      • mjhurdle

        why?

        • Jeff

          because, now just do what I tell you!!

  • Rebuilding

    Good for Scott Feldman. Our prove-it contract with him really worked for both sides

    • mjhurdle

      exactly. A win-win. We got Strop and Arrieta, he got a 3 year deal that he wouldn’t have otherwise.

      • On The Farm

        You are completely ignoring the value Steve Clevenger brought to that trade.

        • MichiganGoat

          I think the Feldman sign and trade will become of the better moves this FO has made.

          • Rebuilding

            I like it, but let’s hope not Goat! I hope the Samardzija trade and Tanaka signing eclipse it

            • MichiganGoat

              Yes the Garza trade will likely be better but when looking at costs vs return Feldman could be a major steal.

        • hansman

          If something’s not there, is it possible to ignore it?

          • On The Farm

            Oh no, not you too!

    • North Side Irish

      I’m disappointed. I was hoping the Cubs could sign and trade him again. Maybe make it an annual thing.

  • EB

    Mariners get to keep their first round pick since they have the 6th pick.

    • North Side Irish

      Yankees get a comp pick for losing Cano, but lose it for signing Ellsbury.

      • hansman

        No, yankees lose their first round pick signing Ellsbury

        • cms0101

          Right, Yankees lose 1st rounder but get supplemental pick at the end for losing Cano. Mariners lose 2nd rounder. Redsox get supplemental pick for losing Ellsbury.

          • MichiganGoat

            Don’t the BoSox get the Yankees first rounder for Ellsbury not a supplemental round pick?

            • cms0101

              No, that was the old CBA. Now teams forfeit their picks and the other teams get the supplemental pick for losing the player.

          • North Side Irish

            Actually, Yankees lost their 1st rounder for signing McCann…so they lose their next highest pick for signing Ellsbury, which in this case is the comp pick for Cano. They’ll get another comp pick for Granderson when he officially signs.

            Mariners lose pick #60(ish) for signing Cano.

            • hansman

              I knew that was going to happen after I hit submit

            • North Side Irish

              Mark Feinsand ‏@FeinsandNYDN now
              An MLB spokesman just said that the Yankees will not have to give up either sandwich pick for Ellsbury. They will give up their 2nd rounder.

              Nevermind…

              • Noah_I

                Yeah, you only give up your picks in your highest official eligible round.

                So if a team won the World Series, tendered qualifying offers to 5 guys who all left for other teams, then signed 5 guys who received qualifying offers from their prior teams, the reigning WS champ would not have any picks in rounds 1-5 of the draft, but would have 5 picks in the sandwich round.

  • MichiganGoat

    19 deals reported this week… I’d love to see a comparison to previous years.

  • mjhurdle

    i wonder, with all the things happening so fast, if you were to tweet out some sort of vaguely believable Shark trade right now whether someone would just take it and run with it…

    • Professor Snarks

      Of course they would. It seems that those that comment on sports blogs have become true ‘sources’.

      If you do put something out there, I would like a Shark for CarGo trade. Thank You.

  • http://bleachernation Ferris

    Why not garza…… now i see spankees as poss. Getting him…uuuuhhhhggggg

    • Jeff

      they can have him

    • Senor Cub

      Ferris – that is exactly what I was thinking, why not Garza? Garza is lightning better than Jackson and he’s still here. Could give garza 4/61 or 3/55 or something like that. Remember the starting line-up was not the problem for the first half of the year it was the hitting and the worst bullpen in the majors that were costly.

      • Rebuilding

        Word is that every team who has had Garza in the clubhouse for any length of time can’t wait to get rid of him – including the Cubs

        • Jeff

          Garza to the Yankees then….lol

      • cms0101

        If Garza would take 4/61, I would say go for it. But the whole reason he didn’t sign an extension is because he wanted quite a bit more than that. It would be the best possible signing. They know him already. He claimed to like playing here. They won’t have to give up a draft pick. The problem is he knows that he’s the next best free agent starter on the market, next to Tanaka. So once that domino falls, Garza’s offers will start to come in. I don’t think he’s going to bite on a deal like that because he’ll get $100+ million from someone else on a long term deal.

      • Headscratchin

        I wonder how Garza was in the club house and what kind of leadership he provided and if that is why you don’t hear anything about the Cubs bringing him back. Gotta love the belly fore, but the guy seemed to be a bit goofy and “Zambrano” like in his comments and actions.

        • Headscratchin

          *belly fire

        • Jeff

          I think the biggest reason is that this Front Office isn’t going to spend more than 5 Million this off season.

  • jay

    I see nobody learned anything from the Pujols deal. One one hand, the Yankees were smart to hold firm at 7 years and the money they were offering, on the other hand, how you give Ellsbury 7 years and 150 mil and then turn around and barely offer Cano any more boggles the mind. Whatever. Hope the Mariners enjoy paying the last half of that contract. And hope the Yankees enjoy paying Ellsbury to sit in the trainers room half the time.

  • http://BN Sacko

    Brett, my compliments on your coverage of all this information! I think very remarkable to take up a lot of my mourning in a good way. Holy..I also enjoy all opinions including my own in which I have learn alot. Keep up the great work!

  • hansman

    Robinson Cano to the Mariners to never be a big thing in sports again.

    • Rebuilding

      He’ll be too busy stacking bills

  • v23

    I take my want for Cano back. Wow, that’s ridiculous.

    • On The Farm

      And Cubs fans screaming for Theo to sign Cano and Ricketts for being to cheap finally begin to realize that Cano was never going to happen, nor should it have.

      • Jeff

        I’m not going to stop screaming that Ricketts is cheap because we didn’t sign Cano, I never wanted him in the first place.
        I’ll continue to scream Ricketts is cheap because he is cheap. and by definition, taking funds out of the team to pay off debt, yep that lands you into the cheap category.

        • hansman

          Well then he is doing cheap all wrong.

          • Jeff

            He unfortunately owns the team so we are at the mercy of his “cheapness”

            I guess we are at a chicken or the egg dilemma, you can’t spend money and bring in free agents and also play poorly enough to get top draft picks.

            My point of contention is that they have taken too long to finally admit they are in tanking mode and cutting payroll to do that.

            The smoke is finally clearing and now we know the true picture, we will tank the next two years to get high draft picks before this FO will be able to spend money on free agents.

            • Rebuilding

              It’s way too early to conclude Ricketts is cheap. And what about the last two offseasons when they explicitly stated they were trying to pick up flippable assets wasn’t clear. Just because they haven’t come right out and said they are gunning for the best draft pick possible doesn’t mean that someone paying attention didnt know what they were doing

              • Jeff

                We weren’t gunning for the best possible draft pick, that’s my problem!
                In a moderately weak draft class, we pick 4th. So far the best looking prospect is Rondon and Houston will probably pick him with their third #1 pick.

                If we are going to be awful and tank it, lets be the most awful and get the #1 pick.

                If I’m sick of being mediocre in winning, don’t you think I would be as pissed off at being mediocre in losing to get better draft picks?????

                Don’t worry, nobody is going to enjoy the next two years that much.

                • Rebuilding

                  I think they tried, but they had to balance some flippable guys like Garza into the mix. It’s very difficult to be as bad as Houston last year

                  • Jeff

                    I don’t know, I’m curious how bad we can be this year..lol

                    • Rebuilding

                      True. Can we get a 2015 mock draft please lol

                  • Jeff

                    I’m still trying to figure out the 2014 draft..lol

                    MLB.com has added the 2014 draft watch.

        • On The Farm

          Obviously if you never wanted Cano in the first place, the post wasn’t directed to you. I was touching on the people yelling at Ricketts for being cheap because he wouldn’t sign Cano.

          But, while we are on the subject, after looking at the money Ellsbury and Cano got, would it have been worth it for the Cubs to spend all that money on those two guys, when clearly they have more than just CF and 2B holes to fill? You develop the core then fill the holes with FAs. This team just doesn’t have the roster to sign a bunch of 30+ year old FAs and hope you got a playoff team.

        • bbmoney

          “taking funds out of the team to pay off debt, yep that lands you into the cheap category.”

          I find that an interesting take. In literally every business in America owners use money earned in their business to pay off debt they incurred either to own or to operate the business. I don’t consider that cheap.

          I may not like that Ricketts is doing that because at one point he said every dollar made by the Cubs is going back into the team (and in my mind debt does not equal the team). But it doesn’t make him cheap in my view.

          • Jeff

            Here is the where the argument is centered….do you have to tank to rebuild.

            Can you not draft well and sign free agents and have both an improved farm system and a healthy major league roster at the same time.

            The rhetoric we are given by this FO is that we can’t! The situation was so horrible that we can only do one, so now we are tanking it by ridding ourselves of most of our high priced players and refusing to add newer high priced free agents.

            if you do that, then your teams record is going to reflect that in wins and losses that translates to high draft pick.

            Houston has been very clear that they have been tanking it but our actions and our behavior have been very contradictory.

          • cms0101

            I agree. They spent a billion dollars to buy the team. How can anyone fault them for using profits to pay off debt, even with the overanalysis of his comments that every dollar goes back to the team. It’s not like they’re taking that money to fund vacations like the McCourts. They bought the team with what would have been their inheritance. They’re doing the sensible thing of making it self-sustainable, rather than tapping into whatever financial reserves they, or dad, might have. If they start drawing funds out of the business to invest in other unrelated businesses, or take vacations with it, then I’ll be pissed. But I never imagined they wouldn’t use revenue to pay down the debt, so this just doesn’t bother me.

          • Senor Cub

            What is up with the RICKETS bashing all of a sudden?! In your recent memory who has even tried to address anything with the field, the players, roof-tops, scouting, and on and on and on…..

            C’mon don’t be cry baby schmucks! He has done more for this team than anyone has in my 30+ yrs of being a fan. It’s not reflective in winnings yet but it will be….please be patient, I’ve invested 30+ yrs of my life and for the first time I am really excited for what’s about to happen in a couple of years.

            I hope they don’t trade Shark but instead add to the pitching. Tanaka would be a huge booster for this club and for my psyche, which is ultimately more important. Although if they don’t land Tanaka, it’s not the end of the world. This team has one of the best farm systems now and that was by trading pieces that quite honestly weren’t that great to begin with, you don’t hear much about those guys anymore( Garza, Soriano, Dempster, etc…) so if anything you should be praising the FO for making those moves when the value for those guys were high.

          • aaronb

            I could care less if Ricketts wants to be a cheap corporate raider.

            I DO care that he has decided to buy MY favorite team and decided to be Jeff Loria or Frank McCourt.

            He can go be American by maximizing his profits somewhere else.

            • Jeff

              + 1,000,000

            • bbmoney

              Is that in response to my comment? I’d like to reiterate that every business in America uses company profits to pay company debt. That’s not a rationale for calling someone cheap. If you have other reasons for calling him cheap…fine, but that particular argument doesn’t pass muster.

              However, I will note that I find comparing Ricketts right now to Jeff Loria and the wool he pulled over the eyes of the good people of the Miami-Dade County because he’s using cubs revenues to pay off the team’s debt………somewhat hilarious. If the SEC investigated every business owner who uses company revenues to pay company debt I’d go apply for a job at the SEC because they’d need a lot of new employees.

              • aaronb

                McCourt is the carbon copy comp for the Ricketts ownership model. He bought the team and.

                -Slashed payroll in half.
                -Raised ticket prices.
                -Attempted to strong arm the city and state for improvement dollars
                -Has allowed the MLB product to flounder going on a 4th consecutive year
                -Is currently doing lord knows what with half the media rights deal that he just opted out of

                We are literally a divorce and substantiating spilled documents away from it being McCourt groundhog day.

              • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

                I’m not looking to agree with the Ricketts bashers here, but one point of clarification: the Cubs don’t have debt. The Ricketts Family took on debt in order to purchase the Cubs. The debt being serviced/paid down benefits the Ricketts Family, not the Cubs entity.

            • mjhurdle

              I could care less if people want to ignore reality and be irrationally angry.

              I DO care that he has decided to ignore reality and be irrationally angry with MY favorite team.

              they can go be irrationally angry somewhere else.

      • BT

        the meme will survive in a general “we never sign anyone” way though, specifics of their deals be damned.

      • Kyle

        If the Cubs had been managed well over the last X years, Cano would have been a possibility at this price and even a good move.

        • hansman

          A good move? Hahahahahababahahahahahahaha

          • bbmoney

            Cano at 24M per isn’t crazy. The years might be a bit, but he’ll probably be worth more than 24M over the next few years.

            • On The Farm

              Right, he probably took 24/year because he was getting that many years. If it would have been a 7 or 8 year deal maybe he wants 27 or 28 or who knows per year. Sure the production probably won’t drop off in the next few years, but after that..

              • bbmoney

                After that you live with it. If you’re a team ready to compete now (which is I think what Kyle is saying) this deal could absolutely make sense.

                I don’t think it does for the Mariners unless it’s coupled with some other huge moves. Nor for the Cubs right now. But Cano could easily be worth 35 WAR the next 10 years and if we believe in linear WAR/$ value in general thats ~6.9M/WAR. Factor in some inflation to the 6M / WAR right now and you’re not far off.

                You can eat a couple dead years (admittedly it could be more than a couple) if he provides value now and you’re ready to compete now.

                • On The Farm

                  “But Cano could easily be worth 35 WAR the next 10 years”

                  Really? He put up 37.1 WAR in his first 9 seasons. You think he can put up a 35 WAR in years in which his production is declining?

                  • Norm

                    Using “his first 9 seasons” is misleading. 29 of that war came in the last 5 years. Maintain a year or two, decrease by 1/2 win every year, you get in the 30′s.

                  • Kyle

                    ZIPS does

                    Here’s it’s projections for Cano for the contract:

                    5.5, 5.2, 5.0, 4.6, 4.0, 3.3, 2.8, 2.2, 1.6, 1.1

                    Total: 35.3 wins

                    • On The Farm

                      Curious as to what ZIPS said about A-Rod did they predict 4, 3.7, 1.9, .5, + two more years, and he isn’t getting healthier.

                      Or did they predict Pujols putting up 4.4 WAR in his first two seasons as a Angel?

                      It appears ZIPS doesn’t factor in injuries that tend to happen to players as they get older.

                    • Norm

                      “It appears ZIPS doesn’t factor in injuries that tend to happen to players as they get older.”

                      Of course it doesn’t because no one can predict injuries. If ‘fear of injury’ is going to prevent you from signing any big name free agents, you’re not going to sign any big name free agents.

                    • On The Farm

                      ” If ‘fear of injury’ is going to prevent you from signing any big name free agents, you’re not going to sign any big name free agents.”

                      Yes and no.

                      Sign a big time free agent who is 30 for 7 years
                      Sign a big time free agent who is 30 for 10 years

                      You increase your chance of injury with the big 10 year contracts that it just won’t live up to the value. I am not saying don’t ever sign big Free Agents, but 10 years is too rich for me.

                    • Norm

                      “Sign a big time free agent who is 30 for 7 years
                      Sign a big time free agent who is 30 for 10 years”
                      -
                      So you’re only concerned about the FA’s age 38, 39, and 40 season when said player is only going to give you 1-2 WAR anyway. An injury at this point might even be a benefit to the team!!

                      The end of the deal, like you refer to here, is going to be an albatross. You have to expect that going in. It’s the front end of the contract that you need to get the most benefits from the free agent.

                    • On The Farm

                      The end of the deal, like you refer to here, is going to be an albatross.”

                      That’s true, but the back end of a seven year deal could be 3-4 years, the back end of a 10 year deal is 5 years. I just don’t think 10 year deals are worth it. If the Cubs did have a team that was set up to win and wouldn’t be financially hamstrung from the deal (to the point no signings after occur) I could maybe get on board with it. But I would much rather not sign the marquee FA and go for the “second tier” 7 year contract guy.

                    • bbmoney

                      “If the Cubs did have a team that was set up to win and wouldn’t be financially hamstrung from the deal (to the point no signings after occur) I could maybe get on board with it.”

                      That’s all I’m trying to say. I’m certainly not saying the Cubs should have signed him right now for 10/240. That would have been exceedingly stupid (in my opinion). It’s all based on the circumstances. If the Cubs won 83 games last year (M’s didn’t either….so I don’t get it for them either) and/or were starting a new $2B 17 year TV contract next year……it may have made sense.

                    • Kyle

                      You can ask the creator of ZIPS if you want, he’s usually pretty good about answering questions.

                      Yes, it accounts for the possibility of injuries as the player gets older.

                  • bbmoney

                    Yeah, really. The actual ZIPs system they just ran showed him being worth a projected 35.3 WAR the next ten years. I didn’t just pull that number out of thin air.

                    Cano is really freaking good and 31 ain’t dead for an athletic middle infielder. 5% inflation on 6m/WAR in 10 years shows 1 WAR being worth over $9.5M.

                    All of this is of course theoretical, if he gets hurt, you’re screwed…that’s the biggest risk. But if you’re a team ready to win now (which the M’s aren’t) this deal can absolutely make sense. It probably doesn’t for the M’s (or the Cubs).

                • hansman

                  That’s also assuming that he is going to defy the history of MI and remain even slightly productive past 35.

            • hansman

              If you could get him on a 2/48 deal, sure. But that’s as possible (and as ludicrous) as me getting to eat cheeseburgers off Kaley Cuoco’s tummy.

              • bbmoney

                In a theoretical world where Cano signs for 2 years. He gets a lot more than $48M.

                • hansman

                  But if he did and we are living in that world, Kaley owes me a date!!!!

              • YourResidentJag

                Kaley dated Johnny Galeki…so who knows. She might like that. ;)

                • Jeff

                  eating hamburgers or eating hot dogs??? both apply

            • http://bleachernation.com woody

              Why does it seem that as soon as these guys get the mega deal they lose the fire in the belly and in a few years are relegated to obscurity? Pujols, A-rod, those two come to mind. I think Cano has some big years ahead of him, but ten years is plain LOCO.

              • oswego chris

                not so much losing “fire in the belly” as “PED’s in the system” that allowed late thirty somethings to improve somehow….the Cano contract is absolute lunacy….

          • mjhurdle

            Hansman, you summed up my thoughts on that exactly :)

        • bbmoney

          Sure, but solve for “x”.

          That’s where disagreements will rise.

        • On The Farm

          What is the range of X?

          Is it just the time period since Ricketts bought the team, or does it include years before the purchase? I am just curious because if it was before the Ricketts purchase you could say that about a lot of moves in general.

          For instance if X years ago, with the proper management, the Cubs could have drafted better young talent (as opposed to getting under slot guys in the first round) and have a better farm to try and trade for Price too.

          • Kyle

            It probably has to go *really* far back for the Cubs to have that kind of cash. You need to have the 2000s turn out the way we hoped back in 2001ish, *and* have the TV deals time out better.

        • JB88

          Help me understand why this would be a good move. At $24MM per season, and even at the current cost of a win-share, you are talking about needing probably somewhere between 30 to 40 WAR over the life of the contract for it just to be a break even deal. Maybe it is possible for Cano to do that, but it seems awfully risky for a guy who’s put up 37.1 WAR for the entirety of his 9-year career, which already includes his most productive years.

          I’ll be honest, while I’m all for the Cubs being in a position to spend $240MM on a single player, I don’t think Cano every would be that player.

          • Norm

            29 fWAR come over the last 5 years. Maintain that over the next 1-2 years, then drop by 1/2 war a year and it ends up in the 30′s.

          • Kyle

            As noted above, ZIPS projects Cano to 35.3 wins over the next 10 years.

            At the price of a win with normal inflation, that gets you pretty close to $240m.

            Now consider that $/WAR is flawed. Two types of teams can and should pay more for a high-win player: Teams with a lot of money, and teams that project to be in the low-80s or mid-80s in win total.

            IF the Cubs in one or both of those situations, then I’d be all over 10/$240 for a player like Cano.

        • Norm

          I agree with Kyle…10 $240 could be a good move for the right team. I don’t think it is for the M’s at this point, but if a team like the Pirates or Cardinals had a hole at 2B, could have been perfect for them.

          It won’t be in 5 years, but as its written on Fangraphs a lot these days, you have to accept the overpay on the back end to get the value on the front end….and those teams are in a good position to be good for the next 3-4 years or so.

          • ssckelley

            It is a little confusing for the M’s to be all over Cano, especially seeing how much good/young talent they have in the middle infield. But now that they have signed Cano they have some interesting trade chips in Miller and Franklin that could be offered to teams like the Pirates and Cardinals.

            Cano is going to serve them well next season, he brings a proven veteran bat to the middle of a fairly young lineup. If their next move is to sign Tanaka they will be in the mix in the West.

  • Rebuilding

    Outside of just the stats and numbers, I t don’t think these deals make a lot of sense because of the heart. I may catch some flak about TWTW but I think in cases like Cano and Pujols – where they have come up with a team, broken into MLB with the team, been the face of the franchise and connected with the fans – getting a ton of money but moving across the country and becoming a mercenary likely saps some motivation from you. Or maybe it’s just the money – once you get a deal like that I could see some guys cutting back the offseason workouts (or in Pujols case getting off the juice)

    • YourResidentJag

      They don’t. I was watching Boston baseball anaylsis on TV in light of the Ellsbury contract. The analysts went through all of the players paid over $20 AAV over the past ten years. Nine tenths of the contracts made no sense.

    • Edwin

      It’s tough to judge. Maybe the players end up performing worse because they feel less motivated. Or maybe it’s because most of these contracts are being signed by players right after they hit their peak, so they have nowhere to go but down.

      • Jeff

        Hey Edwin,

        Are you talking about your contract?

        Dude, I’m still trying to get my money, stop trying to ruin it for me man.

        Shark….

  • Fastball

    Happy for Cano. Rake it in if and when you can. You could have a career ending injury in ST or walking across the street. Mariners have a plan. What’s next?

  • http://mccarronlegal.com jmc

    that deal is insanely stupid.

  • cubzfan23

    So much movement and winter meetings still 3 days away.

  • Blackhawks1963

    Yankees dodged a bullet. Now they can go sign Tanaka, Kurodo and Drew, then watch and laugh as Cano half asses it for 10 years in Seattle.

    • Norm

      Half asses it? Really?

      • Blackhawks1963

        Cano’s lackadaisical play was a frequent issue In NY. And let’s face it, he definitely wanted to return to the Yankees. He took the money, period and I bet by the time he wakes of tomorrow he deeply regrets it already. Cano in Seattle will not go well. I could care less however.

        • http://thenewenthusiast.com dw8

          It seems as though you could care less, otherwise you wouldn’t have posted this clearly contradictory confusing reply.

    • http://thenewenthusiast.com dw8

      Why would he half-ass it, because he got paid?

  • Eric

    And to think that some of the doom and gloomers would have had us paying Cano $69/second for the next 10 years.

  • Jon

    I’m sure Cano was half-assing it as evidenced by all those 5+ Win seasons and gold glove caliber defense. BH1963 do you believe half the shit that comes out of your mouth, or do you type, just to type?

    • Greenroom

      Pot, meet Kettle.

  • CeeDeeVee

    Whoah Mariners are still in on Beltran, Cruz , Shoo and are expected to make a run at Price!

    • Jeff

      I can see the Yankees signing Beltran now to hit 3rd and replace Cano in that line-up.

      • Rebuilding

        I could see this too. A trade for Phillips and signing either Choo or Beltran. And I will now invite derision and laughter by saying the Cubs strong interest may scare them off on Tanaka. Ok, I won’t go that far, but I will say that another big club that could be all-in might make them do what they can now because signing him won’t be guaranteed

      • CeeDeeVee

        I definitely see that as well, good catch.

    • Patrick W.

      They kind of have to be now, no? After this investment, which doesn’t get them terribly closer, they need to go full throttle.

      Sign Napoli, Beltran, Choo and then another pitcher and they are in the hunt.

      I still think a trade for Price which includes Taijuan Walker is dumb.

      • YourResidentJag

        Yep, that trade is extremely dumb. I guess Jimenez might work for them.

  • itzscott

    Reported on radio that the Mariners have said they will now go heavy after David Price.

    That would be a best case scenario for the Cubs as it would take Price off the market to a team that didn’t seem to be in the Shark mix and only serve to drive up his value to the D-Backs and any other interested team.

  • David

    I know there are quite a bit of taxes and misc fees, but if Cano gets 500 at bats for all 10 years of the contract – that equates to $48K per at bat!!!! Only in America.

  • Jon

    Many of you sound like my old man, complaining about the price of gas.

  • Brains

    In related news, Jed Hoyer spent yesterday scouring the waiver lines of Canadian minor league baseball while hiding in his basement.

    • Jeff

      That’s all we can afford this off season, waiver wire signs

    • Rebuilding

      You’re ridiculous, but this did make me laugh

      • willis

        Agreed, that was pretty good Brains.

  • JulioZuleta

    As a Yankee hater, something that just made me smile: A-Rod and Mike Trout have the same number of years before Free Agency.

    As a Yankee hate, something that made me frown: A-Rod’s $30M contract will be off the books the same year that Mike Trout becomes a Free Agent*

    *Assuming no extension-(I don’t think Trout will extend)

  • Die hard

    Old news. I reported this deal yesterday

  • Rich

    Good thing I said no way Cano signs with Mariners..
    Apparently there are 240 million reasons!

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+